Affirmed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 25, 2012.
In The
Fourteenth Court of Appeals
NO. 14-12-00698-CV
IN THE INTEREST OF B.S., CHILD, Appellant
On Appeal from the 314th District Court
Harris County, Texas
Trial Court Cause No. 2011-05195J
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, S.S., appeals a final decree signed July 26, 2012, terminating her
parental rights to the child who is the subject of this suit. Appellant filed a timely notice
of appeal.
Appellant=s appointed counsel filed a brief in which he concludes the appeal is
wholly frivolous and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v.
California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396 (1967), presenting a professional evaluation of
the record demonstrating why there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. See High v.
State, 573 S.W.2d 807 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978). The Anders procedures are applicable to
an appeal from the termination of parental rights when an appointed attorney concludes
that there are no non-frivolous issues to assert on appeal. In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d 326,
329 (Tex. App.CHouston [14th Dist.] 2004, no pet.).
Copies of counsel=s brief and the record were delivered to appellant. Appellant
was advised of her right to examine the appellate record and file a pro se response. See
Stafford v. State, 813 S.W.2d 503, 510 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); In re D.E.S., 135 S.W.3d
at 329-30. More than thirty days have elapsed and as of this date, no pro se response has
been filed.
We have carefully reviewed the record and counsel=s brief and agree the appeal is
wholly frivolous and without merit. Further, we find no reversible error in the record. A
discussion of the brief would add nothing to the jurisprudence of the state.
Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Seymore, Boyce, and McCally.
2